TIME GOES BY | The Fight of Our Lifetimes

by Ronni Bennett

After last week's budget battle, the lines are drawn. Two factions are in control of the debate for the future of the United States:

• The religious zealots who intend to make their ignorance the law of the land
• The corporatocracy who intend to bleed every last dollar from the rest of us for their personal use

Aside from a small number of sane pundits dismissed by the other two groups as leftwing or socialists (horrors!) and a few Congress members (of whom only Bernie Sanders and Harry Reid regularly speak up) hardly anyone, including President Obama, speaks for the people.

The budget debate last week, devolving into an abortion argument over funding of Planned Parenthood, got so stupid I wanted to fire everyone. Crazy, ignorant legislators in Congress apparently never heard of the Hyde Amendment which has banned federal funding of abortions since 1976.

Having defeated the president (who weirdly claimed a win), the zealots were all over the media telling us what we are in store for. Following on Senator Paul Ryan's draconian and fraudulent deficit reduction plan, they made no secret of what's next.

Here is House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va) talking on Fox News Sunday about a proposed $750 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid (transcript via ThinkProgress – my emphasis):

CANTOR: We are in a situation where we have a safety net in place in this country for people who frankly don’t need one. We have to focus on making sure we have a safety net for those who need it.

WALLACE: The Medicaid people — you’re going to cut that by $750 billion.

CANTOR: The Medicaid reductions are off the baseline. So what we’re saying is allow states to have the flexibility to deal with their populations, their indigent populations and the healthcare needs the way they know how to deal with them. Not to impose some mandate from a bureaucrat in Washington.

WALLACE: But you are giving them less money to do it.

CANTOR: In terms of the baseline, that is correct…What we’re saying is there is so much imposition of a mandate that doesn’t relate to the actual quality of care. We believe if you put in place the mechanism that allow for personal choice as far as Medicare is concerned, as well as the programs in Medicaid, that we can actually get to a better resolve and do what most Americans are learning how to do, which is to do more with less.

”Most Americans.” Except for rich people, of course. And don't forget that Social Security is in their sights too. Eric Cantor, again, in March:

“If we want America to be what WE want America to be”?

Which “we” would that be? I sure don't want the America he describes.

It's not just Republicans who are pushing for an increased transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class.

David Plouffe, a White House senior adviser, also made the chat show rounds (emphasis mine):

"'We can't take a machete,' Plouffe said on ABC's This Week. 'We have to take a scalpel, and we're going to have to cut, we're going to have to look carefully.'”


[According to AP, Plouffe also] “said Obama was committed to finding ways for the nation to spend within its means, including reducing Medicare and Medicaid, the government's chief health care programs for seniors and the poor.”

Why in the world are the Democrats – the White House in particular – selling out elders to the zealots and corporations? Perhaps they are counting on support in the 2012 election from the growing number of old Americans who increasingly vote against their own and their offsprings' interest.

Here is another possible reason: The current New York magazine has a graphic showing the previous employment of 14 high-ranking White House advisers. Seven of them, half, are former executives of Goldman Sachs. The rest were hired from Lehman, Citi, UBS, Hartford Financial and JPMorganChase.

These are the people who already stole an estimated $2 trillion in life savings from the people of the United States, an additional $3 trillion in home values through fraudulent mortgage practices, have sent millions of jobs overseas and who pay lower tax rates than you and I.

Now that corporations can contribute unlimited, unreported money to candidates, do you really expect them NOT to do everything else in their vast power to grab all the money that now goes to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security?

With a list like these 14 talking to the President Obama every day, do you really expect him NOT to bow to their demands?

Tomorrow, he will deliver that speech about deficit reduction. I am frightened for us and for all future elders. Obama's past record is not good. He has capitulated to the zealots and corporatocracy at every opportunity and although I hope David Plouffe will be proved wrong, I am not expecting that to be so.

It looks like we are in for the fight of our lifetimes. I don't know if we can win, but there is no choice except to try.

stevegoldada: Attacking Medicaid - Myths and Some Realities.

By Steve Gold 

Aldttacking Medicaid - Myths and Some Realities. Information Bulletin # 320 (4/2011)

There have been a lot of articles and speeches attacking Medicaid: “GOP Governors Seek Leeway to Cut Medicaid,” “Fiscal Health Hinges on Containing Costs of Care.”

Now comes Rep. Ron Paul plan to change Medicaid.....

From article to article to political speech, the drum beat is the same: “Block Grant” Medicaid so states can set their own rules and achieve, hear the drum roll, “flexibility.”

Block grants are allocate federal funds based on the total number of people or the number of low-income people, or some other criteria. Under block grants, States would decide who will be eligible and which “medically necessary” conditions to cover. States would receive a dollar grant to spend as they wish. If you think politicians, lobbyists, and pressure groups are active now, just wait if there are block grants and no federal standards or requirements.

There are a number of reasons for the current activity.

First and probably the most important reason, this is a backdoor attack against the 2010 Health Care Reform Act. Last year, Congress, for the first time in our history, enacted that all low-income people - below 133% of the poverty level - will be eligible for Medicaid in 2014. That’s an addition 16 million low-income Americans.

In the past, Medicaid eligibility was federally based primarily on categories, so that two people with the same income but different sources of income were treated differently. The Health Care Reform Act ensures that two people in the same or different states with the same income and same impairments will not be treated differently.

When you hear Medicaid Block Grants, think “eligibility.” As David Wessel wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “The argument is that with ‘flexibility,’ states can do more with less. But the biggest ‘flexibility’ that states now lack - given that many already rely heavily on managed care and low provider fees - is the authority to reduce the rolls. That leaves them to do less with less.”

What’s fascinating about this conservative attack is that they do not articulate who currently on Medicaid does not need or does not “deserve” to receive health care. What’s at stake is the answer to the question “If a low-income American needs health care, should they receive it?”

Second, States presently have a lot of authority to control their Medicaid costs. Medicaid costs can be contained under the present system, but it does take some political backbone. Despite the drum roll of “out of control” Medicaid costs, these costs can be and have been in some instances controlled. For example, between 2000 and 2005, Medicaid reimbursements for drugs increased by 95.9%. To counter that, States took control and by 2009, reduced Medicaid’s drugs expenditures by 44%.

Another example of States controlling Medicaid costs should focus on why 17.4% of all Medicaid nationally in FY 2009 went to keep people with disabilities institutionalized. States control this. Yes, States throughout the country spent more on nursing homes and institutions for persons with development disabilities than they spent on in-patient hospitalization and drugs! The federal government did not make States do this. Medicaid did not make the States do this! Moreover, many of these institutions provide at most custodial care; they’re the 21st century’s poorhouses and homeless shelters paid for by Medicaid.

Again, as David Wessel wrote in another column, regarding “often overlooked facts.... Medicaid pays 43% of America’s long-term care bill, including bills for about 60% of nursing-home residents.” He correctly points out that right now, without any changes in Medicaid, States could “keep the elderly and disabled out of nursing homes by helping them pay for home or community-based care... It’s cheaper and often preferred by the individual. That push has been under way for years. It’s now at risk as states scramble to save money, and eye cuts to home and community-based care.”

Cheaper, preferred? Why is it not happening? States control this and have decided to buckle under to the nursing home lobby! Ask your State’s nursing home lobby how much they contributed to your Governor’s campaign. It’s not the present Medicaid statute.

Third, presently States pay with State general revenue funds at most 50% of Medicaid costs, and the federal government matches States expenditures. About 36 states receive more than 50% from the federal government depending on the state’s per capita income. The poorer the State the more federal match. Don’t be fooled that the push for “Block Grants” is to help States financial situation. The feds pay an enormous share of Medicaid.

Right now, the Medicaid standard is that only “medically necessary” services and treatment are required. Let the Block Grant proponents identify and list which specific “medically necessary” services should not be paid for.

It’s critical that advocates for disabled older and younger Americans get into the fray. Our lives and the lives of brothers, sisters, neighbors, friends and all low-income people depend on it.

stevegoldada: Attacking Medicaid - Myths and Some Realities.

Spotlight Webcast: Poverty's Impact on Older Americans

ARRP WEBCAST from Spotlight on Vimeo.

More than 6 million people age 60 and over have trouble getting enough to eat. Older Americans are also facing serious financial problems and forced to live in poverty.

What's the latest official poverty rates for the elderly 65 and older? Why do 2/3 of the elderly who qualify for SNAP not filing for this program? What is AARP's Drive to End Hunger? What's the prognosis for those who are most vulnerable?

The new president of the AARP Foundation, Jo Ann Jenkins,  speaks with Spotlights Jodie Levin-Epstein to explore these issues and the solutions the foundation is targeting.

Legal Services Corporation Eligibility Rule Change

The Legal Services Corporation (‘‘Corporation’’) is required by law to establish maximum income levels for individuals eligible for legal assistance. This document updates the specified income levels to reflect the annual amendments to the Federal Poverty Guidelines as issued by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Effective Date: This rule is effective as of January 31, 2011.
Complete Federal Register Notice

Book Review Of Never Say Die: The Myth And Marketing Of The New Old Age By Susan Jacoby | The New Republic

by Sherwin B. Nuland

One evening a few months before my eightieth birthday, I found myself addressing an audience of approximately a hundred men and women on a topic to which I have devoted considerable study during the past decade or so. My subject was the process of aging, and the ways in which current gerontological research is teaching us to deal with it. It is hardly remarkable that such a theme would engage a group whose average number of years on this earth appeared to be approximately sixty-five, especially when the speaker is a rising octogenarian known to have written abundantly about such matters.

During the course of my talk, I focused—as does much of the recent scientific, clinical, and general literature—on the optimistic. I stressed the role of determination and conscious effort in combating certain of the ravages that nature inflicts on those of us in the latter decades of life. I spoke of the importance of physical exercise, the creativity that comes with continued intellectual exploration, the critical importance of a personal sense of closeness to family and the surrounding community. Such essential patterns of living are easily explained, and they were more or less familiar to the upper-middle-class audience of friends and benefactors of the university medical center to which I had been invited.

But I also described newer and more abstruse matters, such as our present understanding of the brain’s plasticity, which allows it to change and even to improve not only its ability to function but also its actual microscopic structure, and to do so regardless of chronological age. Even more remarkable, I pointed out, was the laboratory identification of protein substances produced during the exercise of mind and muscle, such as brain-derived neurotrophic factor (or BDNF), which acts to protect neural connections and to enlarge their number and strength while increasing blood supply to the cortex and encouraging the conversion of adult stem cells into cortical nerve cells. The message I delivered was this: the key to continuing productivity is continuing productivity. It is, as the late Ann Landers famously said about a particularly intimate problem of aging, “Use it or lose it.”

Not unexpectedly, following the delivery of such a buoyant message to such an audience, the applause was enthusiastic. But then a hand shot up, whose owner was a red-faced, chokingly angry man in the first row who appeared to be about sixty years old and to have deliberately disregarded the instructions on the event’s invitation that gentlemen wear business attire. Windbreaker askew, he was already halfway out of his seat and still impatiently rising before I was able to acknowledge him. I cannot recall the exact outpouring of words that he more spewed than spoke, but they were very much like the following, if a bit less organized: “What you’re saying is all very well, but don’t you realize that it applies only to men and women of means and education? The vast majority of the elderly don’t know about these things, and couldn’t afford them in any event. They often live alone and friendless or in some publicly subsidized care facility. Your ideas are suitable only for the more favored of older people. Society neglects everyone else and doesn’t care about them. Maybe you don’t, either.”
.....
All of this is by way of introducing Susan Jacoby’s disturbing and important book. Her focus is not at all on the advances that gerontological research has made in improving the health, happiness, and sometimes the longevity of much of our older population. She prefers to look into “the uncharted perils that lurk in the region of old age” and the self-delusion of “the expectation that things are going to turn out well if we only conduct ourselves well.” The notion that many of the elderly can postpone or even prevent much of the physical and mental deterioration associated with an increasing life span is, by Jacoby’s lights, the result of “myth and marketing.”

Never Say Die will stir up controversy, but it will also draw attention to social issues often ignored in our enthusiastic promotion of the health-sustaining values and behaviors in which we have placed so much faith in recent years. The book is in this way an important corrective to those of us who are so taken with the realization that conscious will and a determined approach are valuable resources that we forget the unpalatable fact that we live in a multi-tiered society in which the best will in the world, and the most determination, are limited by the reality of the actual circumstances of life.

Continue Reading

HHS Increases Total LIHEAP Funding Available to Help Low-Income Families to $3.9 Billion

Image via Wikipedia
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius recently announced the availability of additional funding to help eligible low-income families meet their home energy needs, bringing the total made available since October 1 to $3.9 billion.  These funds will go to states, tribes and territories under the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and are available under the terms of the latest continuing resolution. 

LIHEAP assists qualified families with their home energy needs such as heating in the winter, cooling their homes in the summer, and insulating their homes to make them more energy efficient and reduce their energy costs.

These block grant funds will supplement two previous releases of funds under continuing resolutions in Fiscal Year 2011.  A complete list of funds available to states today can be accessed at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/news/press/2011/liheap_allocation.html

Individuals interested in applying for energy assistance should contact their local/state LIHEAP agency.  For more information, please go to: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ocs/liheap/ or http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ocs/liheap/brochure/brochure.html   

Many Seniors Living in Poverty Due to Recession

Image via CrunchBase
After the numbers were revised, the 2009 Census revealed that there may be millions of more American citizens living in poverty than originally thought. Those who are aged 65 and over appear to be especially affected by the economic downturn, with poverty rates nearly doubling to 16.1 percent, according to The Associated Press.

The Western region of the nation had the highest rate of residents living in poverty at 19.2 percent. The Midwest had the lowest rate at 12.5 percent.

The news source suggests that the impoverished elderly population underscores the need for the government to strategically plan for aging baby boomers and seniors. One way to correct this problem is to install additional safety measures in the form of old-age benefits or reform Medicare and Social Security systems.
Full Article

Census Bureau says 15.7 percent in poverty - UPI.com

WASHINGTON, Jan. 6 (UPI) -- Using an expanded definition of poverty, the U.S. Census Bureau said it determined that 15.7 percent of Americans -- 47.8 million -- live in poverty.

Included in the new calculation are factors such as family and medical expenses, as well as government subsidies, researchers said. The definition of poverty for families generally ranges from $21,000 to $25,000 annually.

Census Bureau researcher Kathleen Short, the report's author, wrote the "new group of poor would consist of a larger population of elderly people, working families and married-couple families than are identified in the official poverty measure."

People older than 65 and younger than 15 accounted for the rate of poverty being higher, researchers said. Wednesday's report said 18 percent of children and 16.1 percent of the elderly live in poverty.

Full Article:

The Poorhouse: Aunt Winnie, Glenn Beck, And The Politics Of The New Deal

Image by jgarber via FlickrAunt Winnie, whose story is preserved in the archives of the Historical Society of Washington, had been sent to an American institution that was by then some 300 years old and went by a variety of names: the county farm, the poor farm, the almshouse or, most often, simply the poorhouse. She would probably have been surprised to learn that more than a hundred years later, after the virtual eradication of elderly poverty, a powerful political movement would materialize with the mission of returning to the hands-off social policies that made the poorhouse the nation's only refuge for the jobless, the aged, the infirm and the disabled.

That movement's most outspoken proponent is Fox News host Glenn Beck, who doesn't merely pine for the pre-New Deal era in general, but regularly prevails upon his audience to recognize the particular genius of some of the period's presidents, whose ideologies of inaction he holds up as the American ideal.

Full Article

New Poverty Data

In response to the new Census data on poverty, income and health insurance coverage, Spotlight on Poverty and Opportunity has compiled a variety of resources to help journalists, policymakers and advocates locate timely analysis, statements and events examining the new figures. We’ve also provided tools for you to share in discussions about the new poverty data:

• Resource guide: includes a listing of events, blog postings, reports and analysis. The guide will be continuously updated with new resources as they become available.
• Twitter campaign: help highlight the importance of the new Census Bureau figures and raise awareness of poverty in the United States by tweeting about the new data using the #poverty hashtag
• Exclusive commentary: Caroline Ratcliffe and Signe-Mary McKernan  of the Urban Institute authored an exclusive commentary for Spotlight, “Help Children Born into Poverty”
• Idea Generator: in collaboration with Spotlight, American Radio Works launched the Reducing Poverty Idea Generator, an online platform for exchanging ideas about how to help low-income Americans achieve financial security. Post your ideas about how to reduce poverty in the United States.

Spotlight on Poverty and Opportunity is an initiative of the AARP Foundation,
the Annie E. Casey Foundation, The Atlantic Philanthropies, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,
The California Endowment, the Eos Foundation, the Endowment for Health (New Hampshire),
the Ford Foundation, the Foundation for the Mid South, The George Gund Foundation,
the Hagedorn Foundation, Living Cities, the Louisiana Disaster Recovery Foundation, 
the Northwest Area Foundation, the Open Society Institute, the Public Welfare Foundation,
the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Rosenberg Foundation, the Sisters of Charity Foundation of South Carolina, the Stoneman Family Foundation, the Women's Funding Network and other major national
foundations. The Kaiser Family Foundation provides in-kind television and web cast facilities.

Social Security Reduces Number of Seniors in Poverty-Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

GRAY MATTERS: The Consequences of Unequal Wealth Distribution

by Saul Friedman

Shirley Sherrod had it about right when she said,

“Y’all, it’s about poor versus those who have. It’s really about those who have versus those who don’t. And they could be black, they could be white, they could be Hispanic...”

That wasn’t exactly the whole truth, for she and her husband. Charles, were ardent, longtime civil rights activists who understood that years of racism, played a large role in perpetuating the ignorance and poverty in the south among blacks as well as whites.

(Racism is here defined as the belief among many whites, supported by the law, that Negroes were inferior. Only in America did the Supreme Court, in Dred Scott, hold that black slaves were chattel, less than human.)

Overcoming that sad heritage, Ms. Sherrod, who has spent a lifetime helping in the struggles of the poor of all shades put her finger on a fundamental human problem in much of the world, especially the United States - the unequal distribution of wealth among too many of us.

That is the subject of a new book that has become the rage among social scientists and activists in Europe, especially Britain. It’s called The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger, written by British public health researchers Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett who have produced an unprecedented rediscovery of the causes of so much of today’s anger towards the institutions of government and finance.

The book was called to my attention by a Canadian reader, Dr. Rob Dumont, a PhD, from a prominent and wealthy family. In a reply to one of my pieces on poverty, he quoted from the book to tell me that according to its central thesis, the growing gap in many countries between the haves and the have-nots is responsible for more than the misery of poverty.

According to the book, such health and social problems as “Obesity, Mental illness, drug and alcohol abuse, homicides, imprisonment rates, lowered life expectancy, overconsumption of resources, teen pregnancy and the lack of social mobility,” all have in common strong links to inequality of wealth.

Interestingly, the authors, who have exhaustively documented their work, do not denounce the wealthy. Rather they point out that the most affluent citizens as well as the most wealthy countries also suffer from these ills. Their analysis mocks the American Declaration of Independence which proclaimed, “all men are created equal.” The original sin of slavery gave lie to that promise and the lack of equality has taken a toll in this nation even today.

As one knowledgeable Amazon reviewer, Dr. Nicholas P. G. Davies, a Briton, wrote,

“Inequality issues are often presented as being about the poor, but this book shows we are all poorer for living in more unequal societies. Inequality is as bad for the rich as it is for the poor. Society is poorer as inequality becomes greater.”

As Wilkinson and Pickett make clear with dozens of graphs, which rate the nations based on the problems that come with inequality,

“The impacts of inequality show up in poorer health, lower educational attainment, higher crime rates, lower spending of social capital, lower cooperation with and trust of government.”

One graph that shows the “health and social problems are worse in more unequal countries,” makes these points:

“The U.S, Portugal and the United Kingdom rate high in the amount of income inequality. For the U.S., low taxes (by international standards), a weak trade union movement, low minimum wage and a tradition of individualism have resulted in a high level of income inequality.”

Indeed, the U.S., with its obsession with the market economy, has modest social programs, Social Security and Medicare, while most of the other 20 nations listed are social democracies with a broad array of social insurance benefits, including universal health care. Canada is roughly in the middle of the pack, along with France, Spain and Switzerland. Japan and the Scandinavian nations have the lowest income inequality, offering cradle-to-grave social programs.

Some critics suggest that the book cherry picks its statistics and the alleged problems to prove their point. But who could argue with the graph that puts the U.S., the richest country, almost off the charts showing the relationship between a huge income gap – perhaps the highest among civilized countries – and such health and social problems as infant mortality, higher than most European nations, homicide and imprisonment rates (the highest in the world), obesity, child well-being (poverty among children has reached new heights) and drug and alcohol addiction?

Any thinking American can verify the sad truth in another graph that shows these health and social problems are worse in more income-unequal states. With the rise of unfettered rapacious, anti-labor capitalism, which touted sweatshops and child labor, income inequality rose to criminal levels.

And today, as you might expect, the southern states, namely Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Texas, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia and Florida “have high levels of income inequality and much poorer outcomes in the health and social areas.”

These states also have the highest levels of poverty and the lowest levels of education attainment, and in the last couple of years, income inequality has become worse throughout the United States, especially in the industrial north, as a result of the 2008-9 recession which has increased home foreclosures, personal bankruptcies and the numbers of Americans – nearly 50 million – struggling against poverty or near poverty.

Yet at the same time, the rich are becoming obscenely richer. Michelle Singletary, reported in the Washington Post last month that while the average income for the top one percent of earners rose 281 percent, or $973,000 per household, in the last decade, the bottom fifth saw their incomes increase 16 percent, or $2,400 per household.

Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, who wrote the forward for the American edition of the book, noted that today’s CEOs are paid more than 350 times that of the average worker. Surely we’ll see the results of such inequality in health and social problems in the next few years.

In his inaugural speech, President Obama said, “The nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous.” But that’s exactly what has happened as bankers have made huge profits and gotten scandalous bonuses while real unemployment reaches towards 15 percent.

Franklin Roosevelt fought the economic royalists of his day to help Shirley Sherrod’s Georgia get electricity and survive the Great Depression with the Tennessee Valley Authority and the Works Progress Administration. What has Obama done?

One can blame the Republicans or the U.S. Senate, but where is the leadership of the President? It won’t do to give Ms. Sherrod a job. Platitudes like, “I feel your pain,” are not true. It might help to use the powers of his federal government to put Americans to work. But as she said,

“Folks with money want to stay in power and they’ll do what they need to do to stay in power...It’s always about money, y’all.”

Find out more about Spirit Level, at the excellent British web site, The Equality Trust, which supports the messages in the book.

Write to saulfriedman@comcast.net
 ============================================

Income Level for Individuals Eligible for Legal Services Corporation Assistance

The Legal Services Corporation (``Corporation'') is required by law to establish maximum income levels for individuals eligible for legal assistance. This document updates the specified income levels to reflect the annual amendments to the Federal Poverty Guidelines as issued by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Effective Date: This rule is effective as of August 6, 2010.

Final Rule

New York City Council Cuts Health Ombudsman Program - NYTimes.com

By ANEMONA HARTOCOLLIS

A program that for a decade helped New York City’s poor and elderly navigate their way through insurance problems — and that became a model for a similar federal program — has become a casualty of city budget cuts, an administrator of the program said on Thursday.

The $4 million program sent ombudsmen to 25 social service agencies across the city, including the Legal Aid Society and agencies serving Latino, Asian, Polish and Jewish communities across the city.
Those ombudsmen were trained to help people obtain insurance, get health services and contest claims that had been denied by insurance companies and hospitals. The program helped about 10,000 people a year, said David R. Jones, president of the Community Service Society, which administered it.

New York City Council Cuts Health Ombudsman Program - NYTimes.com

Disability.gov: A New Federal/Private Model Promotes Financial Well Being for Americans with Disabilities

By Guest Blogger Dr. Johnette Hartnett, Director of Strategic Partnership Development, The National Disability Institute’s Real Economic Impact Tour and Burton Blatt Institute, Syracuse University

Imagine an unlikely partnership between federal agencies, private sector partners, universities and nonprofits, collectively championing the rights of taxpayers with disabilities.

Now, what at first seemed improbable has become reality. Over the past six years, the National Disability Institute’s Real Economic Impact Tour has established a groundbreaking federal/private model for promoting tax education and financial well-being to Americans with disabilities nationwide.

Thanks to key sponsors like Bank of America, AT&T, Walmart, Acorda Therapeutics, Inc. and others, we've delivered funding and asset-building programs to cities in all 50 states. Since 2005, our partnerships with the IRS and 100 community-based organizations have resulted in free tax filing assistance for more than 650,000 taxpayers with disabilities – representing more than $600 million in returns and more than $120 million in saved preparer fees.

Yet, while we’re pleased to celebrate the above milestones as part of the 20th Anniversary of the ADA, we know there’s much work ahead to ensure that all Americans with disabilities have access to the economic mainstream. Especially considering the following:

• 37 million Americans live in poverty, and 13 million are children less than 18 years of age
• 38 million Americans subsist on food stamps
• 50 million Americans, in any given month, are on Medicaid
• 57 percent of unemployed Americans receive unemployment compensation compared to 40 percent before the recession
• 61 percent is the increase in homelessness in America since December 2007
• 40 percent of Americans accessing food shelters and pantries are people on Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)
• 65 percent of Americans experiencing long-term poverty (greater than a year) are persons with disabilities

The above 65 percent translates into more than 54 million Americans – clearly, not a niche market. In fact, it's a market larger than the United States’ African-American, Latino and Gay markets combined; a market that wields 17 times the spending power of tweens 8-12 years old. It's a market not to be ignored.
Continue Reading

The National Legal Resource Center presents a webinar on Health Care Reform & the Aging Population

With the enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), health care reform finally became a reality. This historic legislation will impact virtually every facet of the nation’s healthcare system, including the programs and services on which low-income older individuals rely.

This webinar will present an overview of how the PPACA will affect older individuals, with a focus on the Medicaid long-term services and supports provisions, the provisions relating to long-term care facilities, and the changes that will have a particular impact on dual eligibles, such as certain changes to Medicare Part D and Medicare Advantage.

The presenters will be Eric Carlson, Gene Coffey, and Georgia Burke, all of whom are attorneys with the National Senior Citizens Law Center.

Sponsorship for this Webinar is provided by the National Consumer Law Center and the National Senior Citizens Law Center.  This webinar is in a series of National Elder Rights Training Project webinars for the National Legal Resource Center.  The Administration on Aging supports the resource center through grant funding.

Title: Health Care Reform & the Aging Population: How the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act will impact low-income older adults

Date: Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Time: 2:00 PM - 3:30 PM EDT

Space is limited.
Reserve your Webinar seat now at:
https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/188759809   

Related articles by Zemanta

• Dr. Nelson: Health Care Reform... (harlemworldblog.wordpress.com)
• Healthcare Reform Its The Law (slideshare.net)
• How Bad Is The New Health Care "Reform" Law? Myths vs. FACTS (projectworldawareness.com)
• Pitfalls of PPACA - The Grandfathering Problem (thehealthcareblog.com)

New Policy Brief Details the "Paradox" of Food Insecurity

Image by Phil Manker via Flickr

Limited resources for purchasing food has a dramatic impact on our health and our risk of developing chronic diseases such as diabetes. Like many health conditions, there are racial and ethnic differences in the prevalence of diabetes. For example, in California, among adults ages 50 and over, the prevalence of diabetes is 11.4% among Whites, and almost twice as high among communities of color; 22.2% among African Americans, 23.2% among Latinos, and 24.8% for American Indian/Alaskan Natives. In addition, the prevalence of diabetes is twice as high among adults with less than an 8th grade education as among adults with a college education. What is even more concerning is that even after adjusting for these socio-demographic trends, adults living with the most severe levels of food insecurity have more than twice the risk of developing diabetes as adults who are not food insecure.
Read Policy Brief

Social Security Is an Anti-Poverty Program

By Ben Veghte, Income Security Research Associate, and Virginia P. Reno, Vice President for Income Security, National Academy of Social Insurance (NASI)

As the deficit commission considers ways to reform the federal budget, it’s worth taking a moment to look at the sometimes underestimated functions of Social Security. By providing life insurance, disability insurance, and old-age income protection to nearly all Americans, Social Security mitigates some of our society’s most severe poverty risks. It does so with far lower administrative costs than private insurance and with guaranteed benefits that are immune to fluctuations in the stock market. About 99 cents of each dollar of Social Security spending goes to benefits—less than one cent goes to administration. Because it works so well and covers virtually everyone, and because many of us don’t appreciate the program until we need it, we sometimes overlook its success in reducing poverty.
Continue Reading

It's win-win for elderly tutors, grade-school kids - washingtonpost.com

By DAVID CRARY

For 73-year-old Rosetta Handy, and the second-graders who dote on her, it's a 50/50 proposition, with winners all around.

"They help me as much as I help them," said Handy of her volunteer work as a tutor at Belmont Elementary School in a low-income West Baltimore neighborhood. "They give you energy. You learn psychology all over again."

Recent research indicates that Handy knows of what she speaks - documenting significant health benefits for the tutors.

Continue Reading

Medicare Savings Programs: Analyzing Options for Expanding Eligibility

Medicare savings programs are designed to provide financial assistance to Medicare beneficiaries whose income and assets are too high to allow them to qualify for full Medicaid coverage. In examining policy changes that would expand eligibility by either relaxing resource requirements or increasing the income limit, the authors find a trade-off between making more beneficiaries eligible and targeting a smaller group of individuals with greater health care needs. Read More